Philosophical Intuitions Fedyk, Mark
Studia philosophica Estonica (Online),
02/2010
Journal Article
Recenzirano
What exactly is a philosophical intuition? And what makes such an intuition reliable, when it is reliable? This paper provides a terminological framework that is able answer to the first question, ...and then puts the framework to work developing an answer to the second question. More specifically, the paper argues that we can distinguish between two different "evidential roles" which intuitions can occupy: under certain conditions they can provide information about the representational structure of an intuitor's concept, and under different conditions, they can provide information about whether or not a property is instantiated. The paper describes two principles intended to capture the difference between the two sets of conditions---that is, the paper offers a principle that explains when an intuition will be a reliable source of evidence about the representation structure of an intuitor's concept, and another principle that explains when an intuition will be a reliable source of evidence about whether or not a property is instantiated. The paper concludes by briefly arguing that, insofar as philosophers are interested using intuitions to determine whether or not some philosophically interesting property is instantiated by some scenario (for instance, whether knowledge is instantiated in a Gettier-case), the reliability of the intuition in question does not depend on whether or not the intuition is widely shared.
Philosophical Intuitions Mark Fedyk
Studia Philosophica Estonica,
12/2009, Letnik:
2.2
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
What exactly is a philosophical intuition? And what makes such an intuition reliable, when it is reliable? This paper provides a terminological framework that is able answer to the first question, ...and then puts the framework to work developing an answer to the second question. More specifically, the paper argues that we can distinguish between two different "evidential roles" which intuitions can occupy: under certain conditions they can provide information about the representational structure of an intuitor's concept, and under different conditions, they can provide information about whether or not a property is instantiated. The paper describes two principles intended to capture the difference between the two sets of conditions---that is, the paper offers a principle that explains when an intuition will be a reliable source of evidence about the representation structure of an intuitor's concept, and another principle that explains when an intuition will be a reliable source of evidence about whether or not a property is instantiated. The paper concludes by briefly arguing that, insofar as philosophers are interested using intuitions to determine whether or not some philosophically interesting property is instantiated by some scenario (for instance, whether knowledge is instantiated in a Gettier-case), the reliability of the intuition in question does not depend on whether or not the intuition is widely shared.
The valuation of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) firms has recently gained attention in the literature. Research has shown that, for valuation of STEM firms, accounting items such ...as sales growth and R&D expenditures matter more than bottom-line earnings. We examine whether, around the time of the IPO, STEM managers apply discretion over the accounting items most weighted by investors for their valuation. We find that investors tend to weigh sales growth and R&D more heavily than earnings in valuing STEM firms and that managers respond by managing those items rather than bottom-line earnings as in prior research. We find that future stock returns of STEM firms are negatively associated with sales management and not with abnormal accruals as for non-STEM firms. Our results illuminate the differential behavior of STEM managers and highlight the importance of a departure from the traditional IPO earnings management paradigm, which assumes that firms mainly manage their earnings.
CD4+ Th2 cells are important regulators of allergic inflammation. CCR8 is thought to play a role in Th2-mediated responses, however, expression of CCR8 in peripheral blood has not been fully ...characterized. Using a fluorescent form of the ligand selective for CCR8 (F-CCL1), we identified the leukocytes expressing CCR8 in human, monkey, and mouse peripheral blood. CCR8 expression is primarily restricted to a subset of human CD4 memory T lymphocytes (15%). Approximately 40% of CCR8+CD4+ T cells express Th2 cytokines IL-4 or IL-13 while 13% express the Th1 cytokine IFN-gamma. In fact, 50% of all Th2, but only 5% of Th1, cells express CCR8. Upon anti-CD3/anti-CD28 mAb-mediated activation, CCR8+CD4+ T cells secrete 3- to 7-fold higher levels of IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, and IL-13 and 10- to 20-fold lower levels of IFN-gamma or IL-17, compared with CCR8-CD4+ memory T cells. Two-thirds of CCR8+CD4 T cells express cutaneous lymphocyte-associated Ag while the majority lack gut-homing receptors. CCR8+CD4+ cells express CCR7 and CD62L and are present in spleen and lymph nodes of mice. Approximately 25% of CCR8+CD4 T cells express CD25high while 20% of CCR8+CD4+ express the T regulatory cell transcription factor FOXP3 accounting for 60% of all FOXP3-expressing CD4+ T cells. In conclusion, CCR8 marks a diverse subset of CD4 memory T cells enriched for T regulatory and Th2 cells which have the potential for recruitment into sites of allergic inflammation where they could participate in the induction and regulation of the allergic response.
CD4 super(+) Th2 cells are important regulators of allergic inflammation. CCR8 is thought to play a role in Th2-mediated responses, however, expression of CCR8 in peripheral blood has not been fully ...characterized. Using a fluorescent form of the ligand selective for CCR8 (F-CCL1), we identified the leukocytes expressing CCR8 in human, monkey, and mouse peripheral blood. CCR8 expression is primarily restricted to a subset of human CD4 memory T lymphocytes (15%). Approximately 40% of CCR8 super(+)CD4 super(+) T cells express Th2 cytokines IL-4 or IL-13 while 13% express the Th1 cytokine IFN- gamma . In fact, 50% of all Th2, but only 5% of Th1, cells express CCR8. Upon anti-CD3/anti-CD28 mAb-mediated activation, CCR8 super(+)CD4 super(+) T cells secrete 3- to 7-fold higher levels of IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, and IL-13 and 10- to 20-fold lower levels of IFN- gamma or IL-17, compared with CCR8 super(-)CD4 super(+) memory T cells. Two-thirds of CCR8 super(+)CD4 T cells express cutaneous lymphocyte-associated Ag while the majority lack gut-homing receptors. CCR8 super(+)CD4 super(+) cells express CCR7 and CD62L and are present in spleen and lymph nodes of mice. Approximately 25% of CCR8 super(+)CD4 T cells express CD25 super(high) while 20% of CCR8 super(+)CD4 super(+) express the T regulatory cell transcription factor FOXP3 accounting for 60% of all FOXP3-expressing CD4 super(+) T cells. In conclusion, CCR8 marks a diverse subset of CD4 memory T cells enriched for T regulatory and Th2 cells which have the potential for recruitment into sites of allergic inflammation where they could participate in the induction and regulation of the allergic response.
PDF
